Browsing by Author "Goss, KA"
Now showing 1 - 12 of 12
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Item Open Access Bringing Organizations Back In: Multilevel Feedback Effects on Individual Civic Inclusion(Policy Studies Journal, 2019-05-01) Goss, KA; Barnes, C; Rose, DPolicy feedback scholarship has focused on how laws and their implementation affect either organizations (e.g., their resources, priorities, political opportunities, or incentive structures) or individuals (e.g., their civic skills and resources or their psychological orientations toward the state). However, in practice the distinction between organizations and individuals is not clear-cut: Organizations interpret policy for individuals, and individuals experience policy through organizations. Thus, scholars have argued for a multi-level model of feedback effects illuminating how policies operating at the organizational level reverberate at the individual level. In this theory-building article, we push this insight by examining how public policy influences nonprofit organizations’ role in the civic life of beneficiaries. We identify five roles that nonprofit organizations play. For each role, we draw on existing research to identify policy mechanisms that either enlarge or diminish nonprofits’ capacity to facilitate individual incorporation and engagement. From these examples, we derive cross-cutting hypotheses concerning how different categories of citizens may need policy to operate differently to enhance their civic influence; whether policy that is “delivered” through nonprofits may dampen citizens’ relationship with the state; and how the civic boost provided by policy may be influenced by the degree of latitude conferred on recipient organizations.Item Open Access Civil society and civic engagement: Towards a multi-level theory of policy feedbacks(Journal of Civil Society, 2010-09-01) Goss, KAScholars are increasingly recognizing that design of a public policy influences the scope and nature of political engagement around that policy. Such 'policy feedback' models typically focus on organizational engagement (such as interest group lobbying) or on individual engagement (such as joining associations), with each formof participation treated as a discrete phenomenon. Here, drawing on US laws and regulations surrounding civil society and civil rights, I develop a multi-level model of policy feedbacks that integrates organizational and individual participation. Specifically, I suggest that laws and administrative rules operate on voluntary organizations to structure the resources, capacities, strategies, and ideals of individuals. To develop the model, I draw on policy feedback mechanisms identified by Suzanne Mettler and Joe Soss to derive empirically grounded hypotheses about feedback effects. I suggest that public policy (1) structures the political orientation of civil society by stimulating the development of certain types of groups and strategies, while constraining others, with implications for the range of participatory opportunities afforded to individuals; (2) alters the capacity of civil society groups, including resources and political learning, to channel civic engagement towards non-political strategies of social improvement; (3) affects the framing of strategies in a way that might influence mass attitudes about the optimal form that civic engagement should take; (4) defines civic membership; and (5) forges political community in ways that encourage rights-based advocacy over communitarian notions of public service. I conclude with thoughts on how the theories and hypotheses put forth in this conceptual article might be evaluated empirically and incorporated in practice. © 2010 Taylor & Francis.Item Open Access Does the United States Still Need a Women's Movement? Introduction(Politics & Gender, 2014-06) Goss, KAItem Open Access Donors for democracy? Philanthropy and the challenges facing America in the twenty-first century(Interest Groups and Advocacy, 2018-10-01) Berry, JM; Goss, KAAfter the election of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency, a self-defined “resistance” movement arose to block his agenda. This movement cut across the normal boundaries of political activism to create new forms of advocacy and new models of cooperation. Major components of the resistance were ideological interest groups, women’s organizations, environmentalists, heretofore disengaged Millennials, racial and ethnic groups, community nonprofits, and, ostensibly, foundations and leading philanthropists—those we term “patrons.” We systematically examine the behavior of patrons to determine what role they played at this unique time in American history. We place this research in the context of interest group behavior, asking how patrons may have facilitated representation, altered strategic plans, reoriented advocacy, and repositioned themselves within policy communities supporting similar goals. Our findings undermine the idea that patrons played a central role in the developing resistance to the new administration, despite the fact that the new president was working against their values and the programs they support. However, a non-trivial minority of patrons, both institutional and individual, did mobilize their voice, institutional resources, and coalitions to resist the Trump agenda. These examples allow us to explore how patrons in some conditions might fulfill the roles of interest groups conventionally understood.Item Open Access Foundations as interest groups(Interest Groups and Advocacy, 2018-10-01) Goss, KA; Berry, JMFoundations are traditionally viewed as civic-minded but politically neutral organizations. Yet foundations, if they choose, can become involved in a wide variety of activities aimed at influencing public policy. Here we lay out the rationale for thinking about foundations as interest groups in the American political system. There are differences between conventional interest groups and foundations to be sure, but there are similarities as well. The choices foundations make as to whether to consciously try to influence government appears to be guided by organizational norms, regulatory requirements, and the beliefs of boards, donors, and internal leadership.Item Open Access Gendering the second amendment(Law and Contemporary Problems, 2017-01-01) Carlson, J; Goss, KAItem Open Access Introduction to Advancing Philanthropic Scholarship: The Implications of Transformation(PS - Political Science and Politics, 2018-01-01) Farley, KEW; Goss, KA; Smith, SRItem Open Access Organizing women as women: Hybridity and grassroots collective action in the 21st century(Perspectives on Politics, 2010-03-01) Goss, KA; Heaney, MTThe Million Mom March (favoring gun control) and Code Pink: Women for Peace (focusing on foreign policy, especially the war in Iraq) are organizations that have mobilized women as women in an era when other women's groups struggled to maintain critical mass and turned away from non-gender-specific public issues. This article addresses how these organizations fostered collective consciousness among women, a large and diverse group, while confronting the echoes of backlash against previous mobilization efforts by women. We argue that the March and Code Pink achieved mobilization success by creating hybrid organizations that blended elements of three major collective action frames: maternalism, egalitarianism, and feminine expression. These innovative organizations invented hybrid forms that cut across movements, constituencies, and political institutions. Using surveys, interviews, and content analysis of organizational documents, this article explains how the March and Code Pink met the contemporary challenges facing women's collective action in similar yet distinct ways. It highlights the role of feminine expression and concerns about the intersectional marginalization of women in resolving the historic tensions between maternalism and egalitarianism. It demonstrates hybridity as a useful analytical lens to understand gendered organizing and other forms of grassroots collective action. © 2010 American Political Science Association.Item Open Access Policy Plutocrats: How America's Wealthy Seek to Influence Governance(PS - Political Science and Politics, 2016-07-01) Goss, KAItem Open Access Research Service Learning: Making the Academy Relevant Again(Journal of Political Science Education, 2010) Goss, KA; Gastwirth, DA; Parkash, SGFor at least 20 years, American universities, political scientists, and college students each have been criticized for holding themselves aloof from public life. This article introduces a pedagogical method – research service-learning (RSL) – and examines whether it can provide a means of integrating scholarly theory with civic practice to enhance student outcomes. In particular, we examine whether a modest dose of RSL in the form of an optional course add-on (the “RSL gateway option”) is associated with higher scores on 12 educational and civic measures. We find that the RSL gateway option did not have effects on some important outcomes – such as intellectual engagement, problem solving, and knowledge retention – but it did appear to open students’ eyes to future opportunities in academic research and nonprofit and public sector work. The RSL add-on also appears to have helped students make the intellectual link between scholarly theory and the challenges facing volunteers and voluntary organizations. We argue that RSL, in its gateway-option formulation, is an administratively feasible pedagogy that can simultaneously help to resolve the relevancy dilemmas facing research universities, political scientists, and students seeking connections between the classroom and public policy.Item Open Access Response to holly mccammon's review of the paradox of gender equality: How American women's groups gained and lost their public voice(Perspectives on Politics, 2014-01-01) Goss, KAItem Open Access The Socialization of Conflict and Its Limits: Gender and Gun Politics in America*(Social Science Quarterly, 2017-06-01) Goss, KAObjective: This study considers efforts by gun rights and gun regulation groups to socialize the conflict over firearms policy by engaging a coveted issue public—women. I assess whether gun rights groups have succeeded in weakening women's support for gun control laws and increasing women's firearms ownership. I also examine whether gun regulation groups have succeeded in mobilizing their female sympathizers for political action. Methods: Drawing on two survey archives spanning several decades, I use descriptive statistics and logistic regression to analyze the relationship between women and guns over time. Results: Gun rights groups have had little success in persuading women to become “pro-gun” in attitudes or behaviors. Gun regulation groups have mobilized their female sympathizers but not enough to offset the political engagement of pro-gun men. Conclusion: The findings suggest that civic identities, organizational capacities, and countervailing pressures constrain efforts to socialize conflict through persuasion and mobilization.